Comments upon the Sacred Writings of the Jews and Christians. Exodus Chapter 21. að var 62 IN * MEEK AND MURDERING MOSES. 20 N the progrefs of our enquiries we shall find that this man Moses will cut a splendid figure. He is called a servant of the Lord he is called the meekest man, and his character highly extolled as the intimate friend and companion of God himself; yet from this chapter of Exodus it appears that he commenced the career of his earthly glory by committing murder that he endeavoured to conceal the fact, and at last was obliged to run away to save his life. And he spied an, Hebrew, one of his brethren, and he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand, (verse 11th 12th.) If this had been the only murder of which Moses was guilty his character would have descended to posterity much less stained with blood enormity and crime than it is at present; but in proportion as we make investigation we shall find it savage cruel and ferocious; we shall find that he was the author of actions and commands, which.. which even the bloodthirsty Suwarrow has not exceeded, But some will perhaps affirm in the present case, that Moses was justifiable in taking the part of his countryman against the Egyptian because the latter was smiting the former; but from the circumstances of the case it is to be presumed that the contest between the two was nothing more than a common fight, and that the 1 རྒྱལ་ conduct of Moses resulted from resentment: This presumption is supported by the manner in which Moses behaved himself upon the occasion. The account states that he looked this way and that way to discover whether there were in view any witnesses who could after ward bear testimony against him, and when he found that no person was in view he fell upon the Egyptian and slew him. His guilt is still further confirmed by the circumstance of his burying him in the sand after he was dead. If the action was righteous, why all these precautions against detection? If it was unrighteous, why did he commit it? Perhaps believers will say, it was at the command of God; since they can point out wother cases in which God is sai other cases in which God is said to have given commands to Moses still more wicked and abominable. If the God of the Jews ever ifsued such mandates, then the God of the Jews is not the God of nature-he is not the Gop whom Deists adore; he is an abandoned wretch no better than Moses himself. 10 1 120 On Christian Faith. The nature of human credence as it relates to common objects, is a matter extremely clear and intelligible, Vit is an afsent of mind to the truth of a proposition when that proposition is supported by sufficient evidence; but christian faith afsumes quite a different character: it is wild extravagant and pretends to a thousand things, to the performance of which it is totally incompetant. -In the New Testament it is said if a man have faith like a grain of mustard-seed, he shall say to yonder moun tain, remove hence and it shall be removed! Now eve. ry christian that has common sense knows, that there is not a word of truth in this declaration. I to one, do you believe in the christian religion? he answers in the affirmative, speak then to the Aleghany Mountain to march beyond the Mifsisippi and I will believe too. The mountain does not move I prefs him for the evi*dences of his faith. He stands and either looks like a fool or grows angry. Will you start the mountain?-I say say to cannot. Then you have no faith-I have. Then the book tells a lye, and so you must either prove the truth. of the book by your faith, or I will prove the book is not entitled to credit. Believer how canst thou escape from: this dilemma? The signs or evidences of christian faith are specifically stated in the last chapter of Mark, verse 17 18. And these signs shall follow them that believe:: in my name shall they cast out devils;. they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. Now we challange the whole phalanx of christian believers to verify the scriptures by exhibiting the above mentioned signs. They know that they cannot do it, and yet they say they believe every word contained in the Old and New Testament. It is a pity that the Reverend the Clergy, of all denominations, who make so much noise about infidels and infidelity, will not be so very obliging as to give at least one of these signs as proof of the sincerity of their faith. Take, for instance, that which would be most useful in yellow fever times-they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. Surely if they had faith they would have humanity enough to exercise that faith in behalf of their distressed, friends and neighbours destined to death by the raging influence of Yellow Fever. But no, they can give us no such testi, mony-they make false the sacred word of God in which they pretend to believe. They have faith that the country air is purer than that of the city-away they run, in this they are right enough, but how does this conduct comport with their pretended faith in divine revelation and the signs which this revelation ascribes to their faith. Such inconsistencies denounce the divinity of the book, and prostrate it in silence before the throne of reason Profession of faith of a Savoyard Curate, from Rousseau, continued from our last. How therefore can I be deceived in the relation between these two sticks, particularly, if they are not par allél? Why do I say, for instance, that the little one is a third part as long as the great one, when it is in reality only a fourth? Why is not the image, which is the sen-> sation, conformable to its model, which is the object? It is because I am active when I judge, the operation which forms the comparison is defective, and my under standing, which judges of relations, mixes its errors with the truth of those sensations which are representative of objects. Add to this a reflection, which, I am certain, you will think striking, when you have duly weighed it: this is, that if we were merely passive in the use of our fenfes, there would be no communication between them; fo that it would be impofsible for us to know, that the body we touched with our hands and the object we saw with our eyes were one and the same. Either we should not be able to perceive external objects at all, or they would appear to exist as five perceptible fubstancés, of which we thould have no method of afcertaining the identity. Whatever name be given to that power of the mind, which afsembles and compares my sensations; call it attention, meditation, reflection, or what you please; certain it is, that it exists in me, and not in the objects of those fensations: it is I alone who produce it, altho’ it be difplayed only in confequence of the impressions made on me by those objects. Without being fo far master over myfelf as to perceive or not to perceive at pleafure, I am still more or lefs capable of making an examination into the objects perceived. I am not therefore, a mere fensitive and passive, but an active and intelligent being; and, lay claim to the honour of thinking. I know only that truth depends on the existence of things, and not on my understanding, which judges of them; and that the lefs fuch judgment depends on me, the nearer I am certain of approaching the truth. Hence my rule, of confiding more on fentiment than reason, is confirmed by reafon itself. Being thus far assured of my own nature and capacity, I begin to confider the objects about me: regarding myfelf, with a kind of fhuddering, as a creature thrown on the wide world of the universe, and as it were lost in an infinite variety of other, beings, without knowing any thing of what they are, either among themselves or with regard to me. Every thing that is perceptible to my fenfes is matter; and I deduce all the effential properties of matter from those fenfible qualities, which occafion its being percepti ble, and are infeparable from it. Again, I perceive in bodies two kinds of motion; that is, a mechanical or communicated motion, and a fpontaneous or voluntary one. In the first, the moving caufe is out of the body moved; and in the last exists within it. I fhall not hence conclude, however, that the motion of a watch, for example, is fpontaneous; for, if nothing fhould act upon it but the fpring, that fpring would not wind itself up again when once down. For the fame reason, alfo, I fhould as little accede to the fpontaneous motion of fluids, nor even to fire itself, the caufe of their fluidity. You will ask me, if the motions of animals are fpontaneous? I will freely answer, I cannot pofitively tell; but analogy speaks in the affirmative. You may afk me farther, how I know there is any fuch thing as fpontaneous motion? I answer, very well, because I feel it. I will too move my arm, and accordingly it moves, without the intervention of any other immediate caufe. It is in vain to endeavour to reafon me out of this fentiment; it is more powerful than any rational evidence: you might as well attempt to convince me that I do not -exist. |